Cameron’s political pork

Written By: - Date published: 11:52 am, September 21st, 2015 - 102 comments
Categories: journalism, uk politics - Tags: ,

From the Mail Online:

Revenge! Drugs, debauchery and the book that lays Dave bare: How PM’s snub to billionaire who funded the Tories for years sparked the most explosive political book of the decade

• Read our exclusive serialisation of Lord Ashcroft’s book Call Me Dave
• It makes allegations of drug taking and debauchery by David Cameron
• Suggests he knew in 2009 Lord Ashcroft was controversial ‘non dom’
• PM once ‘put a private part of his anatomy’ into dead pig, source claims

https://twitter.com/grantrobertson1/status/645743604162363392

https://twitter.com/garymlord/status/645725246058684417

102 comments on “Cameron’s political pork ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. save NZ 1
    21 September 2015 at 11:57 am

    Great tweets!

    • AmaKiwi 1.1
      22 September 2015 at 2:01 pm

      News flash from inside the Labour Caucus Room

      Andrew Little pleading, “A pig! A pig! My kingdom for Key’s dick in a dead pig!”

  2. CnrJoe 2
    21 September 2015 at 12:18 pm

    Hameron – Keyreepys political idol.
    Pigtails, ponytails…is Moonbeam o.k? After 8 months of stalking and assault at the cafe Keyreepys gotta be sooo frustrated …..

    (this submission may go too far but the ‘No Drama,…bit of horseplay…here’s some wine..(get drunk?)…’. excuses still have me completely in shock at Keyreepy and his core voters lack of empathy. They are mostly parents – as he is – of women and girls. Most will have sisters, aunties…..I Just Don’t Get It. And I’m Mad AS Hell And Sick Of Taking It.

  3. BLiP 3
    21 September 2015 at 12:20 pm

    ‘

    So, not just his nose in the trough, then?

  4. weka 4
    21 September 2015 at 12:27 pm

    Maybe I’m missing the zeitgeist here, but is this really where we want to be going?

    • Draco T Bastard 4.1
      21 September 2015 at 12:32 pm

      +1

    • Sabine 4.2
      21 September 2015 at 12:45 pm

      they went there a long time ago.

      Lipstick on a pig
      looks like a horse
      would not want to fuck her ever
      horse face
      to fat
      to manly
      crooked teeth
      not even from behind
      fugly
      must be a lesbian cause no man would ever touch that
      must not fuck her husband, hence why he never engaged in any extra martial activities with this or that lady

      and so on and so on

      the difference its a man who is on the recieving end.

      btw. I only listed the more listable things that is sad about wome who run for office, have run for office, or happen to be married to someone in office

      heck there are whole sites devoted to trash talk that Michelle Obama and her audacity of being a women with class, wit and intelligence.

      and frankly after all the rubbish talk that lefties usually get, its nice to see the right eat their young.

      • weka 4.2.1
        21 September 2015 at 2:40 pm

        ok, so you want to be like them, good to know.

        • sabine 4.2.1.1
          21 September 2015 at 5:53 pm

          I, go nowhere.
          The good man calling Jacinda Arderen a “pretty face”, the good women discussing Meritrea’s office wear went there.
          The ones that discuss if Mr. Corbyn would be more ‘electable’ with a beard or no beard have gone there.
          The ones that expected Mrs. Hillary Clinton to automatically file for divorce went there.
          The radio jock who said that a 13 year old teenager looked like a dog because she was a liberal Presidents Daughter went there.
          The news that went beserk over Helen Clarks pant suits went there.

          It is really naive to believe that people that want power, that emulate power would not not do anything to get it and to keep it. And if that means smearing your former, current and future allies / enemies, so be it.

          personally i can actually see these guys do such shit. A prank, a dare, a hazing….shag a pic and you get accepted into the club of future rich pricks wanking.

          so yes, i think it is very funny and even deserving. but then I am not holy and pure of mind. 🙂

          • weka 4.2.1.1.1
            21 September 2015 at 7:25 pm

            Thing is, you’re legimising people doing that to anyone and everyone. Tit for tat, an eye for an eye, but ultimately it’s not that, it’s just we’ll shit on whoever we want for whatever reason we want. Dirty politics, “Labour were at it too”.

            I want the world to change, not to be run by a bunch of left wing arseholes.

            • Matthew Hooton 4.2.1.1.1.1
              21 September 2015 at 8:17 pm

              To be fair to Sabine, it wasn’t the left who raised this “issue” but Lord Ashcroft and the Daily Mail. I wonder if Ashcroft will be welcome at Key’s house again?

              • Gabby …
                21 September 2015 at 8:21 pm

                Well he’s not a Faybeeyun. I wonder if Hammy will be. I wonder if a prominent ex-MP New Zealander will be.

              • weka …
                21 September 2015 at 8:23 pm

                and to be fair to weka, that has nothing to do with my comments.

              • sabine …
                21 September 2015 at 8:30 pm

                no but it is the left that has a good chuckle.

                As I said above, I can see this happening, I can see the lads see who is the most daring and depraved. Hence why Lord Ashcroft could actually report it. Telling, is it not?

                Schadenfreude 🙂

    • Hanswurst 4.3
      21 September 2015 at 5:40 pm

      Yes, that’s a crucial question, Weka. I think it’s important to avoid buying into the content, while trying to use the fact that such a book is being published as an opportunity to highlight the existence of dirty politics; after all, the lines we have generally seen, like, “Smear campain from the Left,” or, “They do it too,” are much harder to bring to bear on this one. Unfortunately, “much harder” does not mean impossible, or even terribly difficult, so it’s important that the offiial opposition make their own position crystal clear lest it be done for them on the back of the Right’s cherry-picking of random public commentary that it chooses to brand as “left-wing”.

  5. Puckish Rogue 5
    21 September 2015 at 12:47 pm

    A whole bunch of Lincoln, Otago and Massey graduates are probably saying and?

  6. mickysavage 6
    21 September 2015 at 12:49 pm

    Maybe there is a god and maybe he or she is a Jeremy Corbyn supporter …

  7. Ovid 7
    21 September 2015 at 12:59 pm

    I wonder if Charlie Brooker was alluding to this in his first episode of Black Mirror.

  8. Karen 8
    21 September 2015 at 1:03 pm

    Dawn Foster from the Guardian is calling it “the Prosciutto Affair” which I suspect will catch on with anybody who remembers Profumo.

  9. Bill 9
    21 September 2015 at 1:10 pm

    Maybe I’m overthinking this, but in light of Corbyn flat stick refusing to engage in any personal mud-slinging and to get politics back into politics – this nonsense just rehabilitates crap masquerading as something important.

    Is Cameron a bit unpleasant and dodgy? Meh – tell me something my interpretation of his politics wasn’t already telling me.

    And then tell me why it matters.

    • McFlock 9.1
      21 September 2015 at 1:19 pm

      well, if it’s anything like NZ then if a photo exists Cameron might get prosecuted and incur a conviction that invalidates him from being in parliament.

      Alternatively he might get rolled or resign in disgrace.

      And it’s tories accusing him, so I suspect he won’t be around for the next election – perhaps some of them are afraid that the pendulum will swing too far (for them) to the left if the tories don’t ease off their war on the poor.

      • tinfoilhat 9.1.1
        21 September 2015 at 1:23 pm

        If they roll Cameron isn’t Boris Johnson next cab off the rank ?

      • Lanthanide 9.1.2
        21 September 2015 at 1:52 pm

        “well, if it’s anything like NZ then if a photo exists Cameron might get prosecuted and incur a conviction that invalidates him from being in parliament.”

        Not really, I doubt you’d find a court in NZ that would prosecute someone over what is effectively a college prank, committed years ago when they were young and trying to impress their friends, given the potential consequences of such prosecution.

        “Alternatively he might get rolled or resign in disgrace.”

        This is far less serious than John Key in his capacity as PM repeatedly harassing a waitress. And look what happened there.

        • McFlock 9.1.2.1
          21 September 2015 at 1:58 pm

          Depends what’s in the photo. I mean, it has about as much chance as Blair fronting up to the Hague, but it’s a possibility depending on their laws.

          “College prank” is all well and good, but it certainly damages his electability.

          • Lanthanide 9.1.2.1.1
            21 September 2015 at 6:19 pm

            Completely agree.

            But that’s not the same as being prosecuted and being barred from holding elected office.

            • McFlock 9.1.2.1.1.1
              21 September 2015 at 9:16 pm

              True. The latter relies on the vagaries of British obscenity or decency laws and their eligibility criteria for elected office.

          • Matthew Hooton 9.1.2.1.2
            21 September 2015 at 8:20 pm

            There won’t be a photo. There never is.

            • Pascals bookie 9.1.2.1.2.1
              21 September 2015 at 8:54 pm

              Yesterday you might have said ‘inserting his shwang in a dead pig’ as an example of a ridic bad accusation that would never happen. But here we are.

      • Bill 9.1.3
        21 September 2015 at 1:53 pm

        (Probably) a cooked pigs head on a dinner table, and Cameron – in line with many an infantile hunter’s photo op – might have stuck his todger in it. He might even have been stoned or coked up too. So what? It’s not a prosciuttable offense, is it?

        You suggesting that Osborne might be teed up to benefit from Cameron’s character assassination? Maybe. (No let up in any class war there btw) So we sit back and titter at politics being gamed like some gossipy personality contest on steroids. Fucking great.

        Like I suggested above, it comes as no surprise that the Cameron’s of this world are somewhat less than attractive human beings. Just look at their politics – all the pony tail tugging or simulating the taking of head from a dead pig or princess parties and what have you – although not specifically pinpointed by their politics, would certainly sit comfortably within the mentality that presumably informs their particularly callous political views.

        Details aside, that they embody a fairly fucked expression of humanity can be taken as read, yes?

        But given the power they can wield, it’s the application of their politics and the impact on society that matters – not any ‘sideshow’ focusing on their personal shortcomings that would have us believe we’re witnessing some exception to a rule.

        • McFlock 9.1.3.1
          21 September 2015 at 2:05 pm

          What I’m suggesting is that this indicates to me that some tories are not at all happy with cameron as leader, and this is the opening salvo in his removal, and a possible change in tack by the tory government.

          So it’s not so much the sideshow that matters, it’s that there’s an indication that a tory substitution might be in the wind.

          “prosciuttable offense” – ugh 🙂

        • Puddleglum 9.1.3.2
          21 September 2015 at 2:52 pm

          “(Probably) a cooked pigs head on a dinner table, and Cameron – in line with many an infantile hunter’s photo op – might have stuck his todger in it. He might even have been stoned or coked up too. So what?”

          I think this part of your comment actually falls into the trap you point out later:

          “personal shortcomings that would have us believe we’re witnessing some exception to a rule”

          The alleged act is not some ‘exception’ to any rule of behaviour in such elite clubs. It’s not a personal aberration. It’s a political regularity.

          Dismissing it as a ‘prank’ or that it is “in line with many an infantile hunter’s photo op” or suggesting it may have more to do with being intoxicated misses the point of – and deflects attention from – these quite deliberate ‘bonding’ rituals amongst the elite. (And they happen with all elites or close knit ‘teams’.)

          This kind of behaviour is not just like your average student’s drunken ‘personal shortcoming’. It’s about the elite forging social bonds between themselves that will supersede (in later life) any formal, public commitments they make. It’s the very backbone of the ‘old boys’ club’ network and its social and political strength and influence.

          Put bluntly, this was not a personal, private act or ‘failing’, quite the reverse – it was a highly political and deliberate act (including membership of the clubs in the first place).

          To be compromised so early in life to one’s elite ‘peers’ is to ensure that you will maintain class discipline (above all else) throughout your life – and to have proved that that is exactly what you are committed to.

          It’s like a gang member committing some ‘beyond the pale’ act in order to be accepted into the gang – crossing the personal Rubicon and allowing others to have access to damaging knowledge about you (not to mention having to face the fact that you’ve been willing to compromise to the group to that extent).

          Why do you think the Spartans encouraged deep personal relationships between soldiers? It was not some accidental feature of their society or early tolerance of ‘personal preferences’ – or even tolerance of ‘boys will be boys’ behaviour.

          It was because it cemented the bonds between the ‘warrior elite’.

          Cameron was not some equivalent of an “infantile hunter“. And he was not like any other ordinary student getting up to ‘pranks’.

          That is to entirely diminish the political importance of this kind of behaviour.

          He was, by contrast, someone with early political ambitions linking into the most influential political class through his associations at Oxford.

          Stay aloof from lurid sensationalism by all means. But please don’t minimise the political – and class – aspects of this kind of behaviour.

          It’s about how the elite (in every society) reproduce themselves – and their power – from one generation to the next. It’s part of how ‘solidarity’ is created in the elite.

          Ultimately such behaviour has very real, harmful impacts on people who have little power in our society.

          It’s not some snickery and smutty sideshow to ‘real’ politics – whether or not some may pursue it in that vein.

          • Anne 9.1.3.2.2
            21 September 2015 at 3:29 pm

            That gels with my experience of them Puddleglum.

            Many years ago I attended an “Elizabethan” party at some small castle outside of London. The ‘hosts’ were a bunch of upper-class (early twenties) male twats – probably Oxford or Cambridge students. They spent the evening telling one another pitiful, unfunny jokes and roaring with ludicrous laughter at them. We ‘guests’ stood around smiling politely as if we appreciated just being in the same room as them. Moi… was one of the first to walk out in boredom and distaste.

          • Draco T Bastard 9.1.3.2.3
            21 September 2015 at 3:33 pm

            A good point. A person compromised to keep him in line and then the public airing of the compromise to get rid of him.

          • Bill 9.1.3.2.4
            21 September 2015 at 3:38 pm

            I think you’ve misconstrued my point. I’m not seeking to excuse or trivialise Cameron’s behaviour. And I don’t think his particular acts demonstrate an exception to the rule. Quite the opposite.

            Cameron and his ilk are humanity fcking rubbing the ground. I don’t think we should ever lose sight of that, but there’s a danger that his pig escapade will be viewed as somehow so over the top and not reflective of any general mind-set, that the ‘next in line’ will be given a free pass and the particular politics Cameron espouses will be separated out and so roll on as a result.

            Rather than seeing Cameron’s behaviours as somehow unusual or aberrant (as I’m picking some will), I’m saying they are par for the course and are reflected upwards and outwards in their politics.

            Put the other way around – pig fucker, princess party organiser, pony tail puller and whatever else – none of it should surprise us insofar as the assumed power relationship in all of it sits on a continuum running through to, or back from, professed political philosophy.

            • Puddleglum 9.1.3.2.4.1
              21 September 2015 at 3:43 pm

              Completely agree.

              I think I may have misconstrued your point. I thought you were trying to dissuade people from discussing the issue or saying it was just like any other young person’s ‘prank’ and has no political significance.

              Apologies.

              • Bill …
                21 September 2015 at 4:16 pm

                I just wouldn’t people to lose sight of the fact that this is what these people are. Abusive disregard; entitlement; assumption of power…running all the way through their personal behaviour and politics.

                And yeah. Something about what Weka said down yonder. Much of JK’s abuse of power got all lost in tittering about a fetish. Sexuality – actual and potential expressions of – and power…it’s a really difficult mix to discuss on a blog.

            • Clemgeopin 9.1.3.2.4.2
              21 September 2015 at 7:39 pm

              “Put the other way around – pig fucker, princess party organiser, pony tail puller and whatever else – none of it should surprise us insofar as the assumed power relationship in all of it”

              I would include being members of the Cabinet Club in that power relationship.

          • RedLogix 9.1.3.2.5
            21 September 2015 at 4:36 pm

            +Several Internets PG

            From my reading this kind of ‘compromise’ sometimes goes well past what we are reading here.

          • swordfish 9.1.3.2.6
            21 September 2015 at 5:01 pm

            Brilliant comment, Puddleglum (and makes my own contribution down-thread look particularly glib and gormless)

          • Clemgeopin 9.1.3.2.7
            21 September 2015 at 7:44 pm

            +1. Well said. Great insight.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 9.2
      21 September 2015 at 1:19 pm

      As an illustration of Ashcroft’s methods and character?

    • Puddleglum 9.3
      21 September 2015 at 3:21 pm

      “And then tell me why it matters.”

      Well for me it’s about what it tells us about politics today and about the classic moral hypocrisy of so many politicians on the right rather than any concerns over lurid behaviour.

      Which is not to say that individuals’ behaviour doesn’t tell us something about their background.

      In this case, I don’t mean the particular alleged act but, rather, the biographical fact that someone would be part of a club – two clubs – renowned for a sense of untouchable, boundaryless entitlement; not to mention the future ‘obligations’ someone might feel towards some member of that ‘born to rule’ club who witnessed them engaging in such behaviours (see my comment above).

      So far as hypocrisy goes, here’s Cameron criticising obese beneficiaries for their ‘lifestyle choices’.

      What kind of a ‘lifestyle choice’ is it for a political leader to have made to emulate the narcissistic excesses of ‘Brideshead Revisited’ and Sebastian Flyte?

      Whether anyone likes it or not, in this neoliberal age most people think about politics and political issues as some sort of expression of personal morality and individual ‘life choices’ rather than in structural-political terms. Some people no doubt even vote on perceptions of Cameron being a ‘nice’, moral and presentable leader of their country (as opposed to your own reaction, this insight may well be revelatory to such voters).

      In that self-inflicted environment of political discourse Cameron will struggle. If you politically live by discourses of personal morality (e.g., beneficiaries lacking moral fibre) then I’m afraid you are likely also politically to die by discourses of personal morality.

      Do ‘we’ want to go there?

      Personally I don’t.

      But it’s an important lesson in how the elite operate.

      Look, for example, at just who is ‘going there’ (Mail Online, Ashcroft) – and why they presumably consider that it will be effective to ‘go there’.

      • weka 9.3.1
        21 September 2015 at 3:57 pm

        When I said do we want to go there, I meant do we want to engage in what is a form of dirty politics? I appreciate your point about the class and power implications and welcome conversation about that. I’m not so keen on oooh look, Cameron is a weirdo aspect.

        I’m also not keen on the muddle around sex and sexuality, because let’s face it, as a country we’re not good at dealing with those things especially the politics of them and in a political context. Some people are assuming it was an overt sexual act that is an offence, others are assuming it was a drunken prank, others are comparing it to sexual harassment (pony tail gate), and others are thinking it’s different because it’s a toff rather than bar full of hunters. All I’m thinking is here we go again.

        Plus what Bill said, there’s plenty of fucked upness in Cameron’s politics and political morality to be going on with, and how about we don’t sling mud and instead focus on the politics.

        • RedLogix 9.3.1.1
          21 September 2015 at 4:43 pm

          My instincts are much the same as yours weka. Unless there is are issues of illegality, gross hypocrisy or political compromise involved sexual matters should generally remain private.

          At the same time Puddleglum is making a fine political point about how the Establishment really works and sustains itself. It is possible I think to cast light on this without overtly panty-sniffing Cameron himself.

          • Editractor 9.3.1.1.1
            21 September 2015 at 11:03 pm

            I don’t see it as a sexual matter at all though. It was an initiation rite. A ritual debasement to prove that you want to become part of the group. After all, if someone is prepared to debase themselves in such an explicit manner in front of their peers to become part of a group, what will they then be prepared to do to stay part of the group?

        • Puddleglum 9.3.1.2
          21 September 2015 at 4:49 pm

          “how about we don’t sling mud and instead focus on the politics.”

          Agreed.

          Any discussion of this which reduces it to individual behaviour and petty sexual morality is going to be fraught with distraction and ‘collateral damage’ to other individuals and groups.

          For me it’s not about Cameron at all.

          It’s about the culture – and structural political utility – of this sort of behaviour. I didn’t want that to go without notice because of a (perfectly understandable) reaction that ‘this is ALL beneath us’.

          In those terms, I suspect that I am thinking of a different ‘this’ than perhaps you are.

          And you’re dead right about the comparison with Key’s supposed ‘fetish’ – that missed the point of the power relations and entitlement involved.

          Similarly, jokes about politicians and pigs heads are definitely a ‘this’ which – in terms of political discourse – should be ‘beneath us’ and certainly not the main political focus.

          But comments about how the elite organise (and discipline) themselves should not be ‘beneath us’. (Whoever ‘us’ might be.). And should not be ruled ‘out of bounds’ just out of fear of fuelling the ‘sideshow’. That yields the field to the ‘sideshow’.

          In that regard, it’s interesting that some of the comment on this thread from those known to be on the right, politically, is leveraging the ‘perversion’ angle. That should be a warning in and of itself about how not to discuss this from a ‘left’ perspective.

  10. swordfish 10
    21 September 2015 at 1:28 pm

    Just your average Old Etonian Tory Toff.

    What was it Alexei Sayle once said (first on the LP of his stand-up routine (Cak !) that my older brother brought home in 1982, then later on an episode of The Young Ones) ? – “All you get from a Public School, right – one, you get a top job, right, and two, you develop an intense interest in perverse sexual practices. I mean, that’s why British Management’s so inefficient. As soon as they get in the boardroom, they’re all shutting each other’s dicks in the door !”

    Or Scots comedian Frankie Boyle on the same subject: “You look at our Ruling Class now and you say, ‘Well, why are they like that ?’. People like Boris Johnson or someone. Well, they’re broken into that system, the same way that the Spartans broke people in. You get taken away from your family aged 7 or 8. You get put into a single sex environment and then they do what a mind-control cult does, you know, they bore you with cricket and latin and latin homework and then, very suddenly, sodomy….(Jeremy) Clarkson comes from a certain background, he’s taught to not empathise. His worst traits are encouraged.

    Or just a few days ago in Frankie’s Guardian column: “Our Prime Minister, a man who can normally muster all the moral authority of Roman Polanski’s penis…”

  11. The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 11
    21 September 2015 at 1:38 pm

    An actual pig fucker argument.

  12. Raf 12
    21 September 2015 at 1:45 pm

    Whew. Once again, can’t wait for the cartoons …

  13. ankerawshark 13
    21 September 2015 at 2:07 pm

    Crosby Textor will be in overdrive trying tofigure out how to respond.

    The stuff I saw in one of the Brit papers about Corbyn’s naked romp in the Cotswalds is absolutely charming and innocent by comparison

    And why private lives shouldn’t come into politics, sexual deviancy i.e. sex with a dead animal is quite a bit different.

  14. mickysavage 14
    21 September 2015 at 2:40 pm

    Looks like the whole things is revenge by Ashcroft. From the Mail online(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3242581/A-broken-promise-wrote-book-LORD-ASHCROFT-reveals-went-supporter-critic-Cameron.html#ixzz3mKwEnqlp ):

    “Suffice to say that my uneasy relationship with Cameron since 2010 dates back to the undertaking I believe he made during that conversation.

    Still, encouraged by the prospect of participating in a Cameron government, I agreed to move into 30 Millbank for the remainder of the 2010 campaign.

    He took me for a walk in the garden, and told me that Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg had vetoed the idea of giving me any job in government

    And, just as I predicted, I soon found myself under the increasingly hostile gaze of Labour and the Lib Dems — particularly over my tax status in relation to my membership of the Lords.

    In 2009, I discussed the matter in detail with Cameron. He was therefore fully aware of my status as a so-called ‘non dom’ — the rule that allows some wealthy UK residents to limit the tax they pay on earnings outside the country.

    Indeed, we had a conversation about how we could delay revealing my tax arrangements until after the election.

    In the event, this proved difficult, because Labour dug out the information under Freedom of Information legislation. But nothing that subsequently emerged in March 2010 about my tax status was a surprise to Cameron. The media furore was unpleasant. But I knew it would blow over, and looked forward to being part of Cameron’s administration.

    So, once he became Prime Minister, I waited — as many do — for him to call me. After hearing nothing for a couple of days, I mentioned this to Andrew Feldman, who was co-chairman of the party.

    Shortly afterwards, Cameron phoned to thank me profusely for all the work I’d done. I thanked him in turn and asked what my next role would be. There was silence at the end of the phone. ‘Ah, it’s difficult,’ he replied awkwardly. ‘We probably need to have another conversation.’

    I was left hanging until the second Sunday after he became Prime Minister, when he invited me to a family lunch at Chequers. He took me for a walk in the garden, and told me that Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg had vetoed the idea of giving me any job in government.

    Disappointed: It would have been better had Cameron offered me nothing at all. However, whatever my private feelings, I had no desire to embarrass him and resolved not to tell anybody what had happened

    Disappointed: It would have been better had Cameron offered me nothing at all. However, whatever my private feelings, I had no desire to embarrass him and resolved not to tell anybody what had happened

    Recently, after Clegg stepped down as leader of his party, my office checked this version of events with his office. Clegg said he had no recollection of barring any Conservative appointments.

    Perhaps Cameron’s conscience pricked him a little, because a short while later, I did get an offer — to be a junior whip in the Foreign Office.

    After putting my neck on the line for nearly ten years — both as party treasurer under William Hague (1998-2001) and as deputy chairman (2005-10) — and after ploughing some £8 million into the party, I regarded this as a declinable offer.
    The people around him were discouraged from speaking to us. Happily, however, a number of those close to him agreed to co-operate.

    It would have been better had Cameron offered me nothing at all. However, whatever my private feelings, I had no desire to embarrass him and resolved not to tell anybody what had happened. I’m revealing it now only to explain why our relationship has been somewhat strained since 2010.

    Despite my disappointment, my new book about Cameron is not about settling scores.

    Indeed, I was so anxious that it should be objective, that I asked Isabel Oakeshott, then political editor of the Sunday Times, to be my co-author.

    From the start, Downing Street was wary. Cameron even privately discouraged Oakeshott from getting involved, warning that she’d get caught in crossfire between us.

    The people around him were discouraged from speaking to us. Happily, however, a number of those close to him agreed to co-operate, sometimes on condition that they remained anonymous.

    This is the result.”

  15. NZJester 15
    21 September 2015 at 2:43 pm

    As long as it was not a male pig he should still have the support of the anti gay lobby and a bunch of other right wing nutters.
    They right seam to be able to forgive anything including murder and incest as long as there was nothing gay involved.

  16. The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 16
    21 September 2015 at 2:50 pm

    My starting assumption is that the English upper classes are fucking dead animals, or slamming each others dicks in the door.

  17. Stuart Munro 17
    21 September 2015 at 4:42 pm

    Interesting that this story has got out there through the usually craven MSM filter – if a story broke in NZ that Key was stuffing dead animals up his bottom I can think of five Herald journalists who would claim they must’ve crawled up there and died.

  18. Rawsharkosaurus 18
    21 September 2015 at 4:58 pm

    Lyndon Johnson must be laughing in his grave.

    • Matthew Hooton 18.1
      21 September 2015 at 8:09 pm

      Exactly. An oldie but a goodie. Not sure Lord Ashcroft isn’t just implementing the LBJ tactic. I doubt the promised photos will turn up – if they existed they would have emerged years ago.

  19. Pascals bookie 19
    21 September 2015 at 5:57 pm

    Whatever else, it’s a wonderful test of partisanship. Seen a fair amount of ‘so what he fucked a pig, no big deal’ about the place.

    • mac1 19.1
      21 September 2015 at 6:45 pm

      Similar to Clinton’s dope-smoking excuse, “I never inhaled”, might Cameron’s excuse be, “I never…….. er …. exhaled.”

      • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 19.1.1
        22 September 2015 at 8:12 am

        It is a wonderful test of partisanship, isn’t it? Ashcroft is an evil bastard who will stop at nothing and balk at telling no lie in the advance of his own interests. Unless, of course, he is talking about David Cameron. In which case, everything he alleges without evidence is undoubtedly true.

        • Pascals Bookie 19.1.1.1
          22 September 2015 at 8:42 am

          Oh I think “Who cares if he put his todger in a dead pig’s mouth?’ is waaay more revealing than “hahaha that’s hilarious”.

          Call me partisan I guess.

          • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 19.1.1.1.1
            22 September 2015 at 9:35 am

            But what relevance, if any, do you attach to the source? Are you just accepting Ashcroft’s account uncritically? If so, will this be your practice from here on?

            • One Anonymous Bloke 19.1.1.1.1.1
              22 September 2015 at 9:39 am

              Who’s accepting Ashcroft’s account? His behaviour is significant whether or not he’s lying.

              • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell …
                22 September 2015 at 10:46 am

                I am not sure what you mean.

                If the thing you find interesting is the rift between Ashcroft and Cameron then Ashcroft’s behaviour is interesting.

                If your interest is in the dead pig fellatio I am not sure we’re closer to the truth.

                • Pascals bookie …
                  22 September 2015 at 11:01 am

                  Sure, Ashcroft is a snake. Tories are tories. Elite oxbridge clubs with weird transgressive behaviour are Elite oxbridge clubs with weird transgressive behaviour.

                  There is nothing unexpected here, aside from all the non-elite oxbridge people popping out of the woodwrok saying ‘Hey now, sticking your dick in a dead pig’s mouth isn’t transgressive, who cares. move on, so what, he put his dick in a dead pig’ etc.

                  These clubs exist, and they do what they do for reasons. One of them is to form bonds, if you like, based in shame. these bonds set people up, form layers of trust within the community. Ashcroft feels Cameron broke the deal. I’ve no problem saying they are both fuckwits, and that sticking your dck in dead pig’s mouth is something that is pretty funny for a sitting UK Prime Minister and leader of the conservative party to have to deal with.

                  And it’s ALSO funny that people are saying it’s not funny at all and nothing anyone should pay attention too. Possibly even more funny.

  20. Michael who failed Civics 20
    21 September 2015 at 8:07 pm

    Don’t all upper class Poms behave like this? Isn’t that why the Nats want to ape them and did so by calling each other Sir and Dame?

  21. Brian 21
    21 September 2015 at 8:08 pm

    Haven’t stopped smiling since I read it this morning. Gold!

  22. Morrissey 22
    21 September 2015 at 8:24 pm

    Is this true, or is somebody telling porkies?

  23. Visubversa 23
    21 September 2015 at 9:37 pm

    Certainly adds to the “live boy or dead girl” options.

  24. gnomic 24
    21 September 2015 at 10:05 pm

    Some slight claim to knowledge of a deceased pig’s head here — once I had to cleave one in two in a hospital kitchen. From neck to nose. i forget how many strokes it took. You’ll be pleased to know I still have a full complement of fingers.

    But seriously what the hell does this bollocks about the juvenile predilections of the UK regime leader matter? Instead look up Amber Rudd.

    Why just this evening I have seen these stories. And that is why I suspect we are all doomed. Why even bother to make a will? Forget the people of tomorrow, even we boomers may be doomed to ghastly fates.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-somerset-34306997

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/climatechange/11759619/Climate-change-debate-dictated-by-left-wing-anti-capitalists-says-Amber-Rudd.html

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/energy/11878566/Hinkley-Point-new-nuclear-plant-edges-closer-with-2-billion-Government-guarantee.html

    http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/sep/21/nuclear-plant-project-osbornes-commits-2bn-guarantee

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-34290960

    And so on and on.

    Yes, the leaders of the Chinese and UK regimes are collaborating to enforce nuclear power because we the people need it. Righto?

  25. millsy 25
    21 September 2015 at 10:49 pm

    I cannot say I am really suprised. All these rich boy toffs do these at uni as part of these initiation ceremonies. Im picking so they can be blackmailed later on in their careers, like that society at Yale.

  26. xanthe 26
    22 September 2015 at 8:20 am

    Very serious business, its about creating social bonds that overrule ethical and societal obligations! it can Happen in any political and ngo organisations that a social hiearchy oversets the visable structure. dangerous and unethical. And not confined to the “right”. There but for fortune

    • Pascals bookie 26.1
      22 September 2015 at 11:33 am

      “There but for fortune”

      speak for yourself mate, personally, its ‘there but for the fact that while I’ve done many things, I’ve done nothing even faintly like that’

  27. Clemgeopin 27
    22 September 2015 at 11:26 am

    Ashcroft tweets a classic!

    Just finished my third day on the Battlefields of Gallipoli. Fascinating experience. Must catch up with what's happening in the UK.— Lord Ashcroft (@LordAshcroft) September 21, 2015

  28. Anno1701 28
    22 September 2015 at 12:06 pm

    Today im here to talk about me and pork….

    Getting piggy with it !